About your Search

20130416
20130424
Search Results 0 to 6 of about 7
before they read miranda rights. this would have falln in the category you can't use this in court but this is what we needed to know if it was more substantive or is that unclear? >> it's not clear whether he provided this information before or after he was read his miranda rights. i don't know. . i know, this is according to a government source, what he has told them in the preliminary investigations. >> jake tapper, thank you very much. obviously significant information there. new information from jake tapper. i want to bring in our panel live tonight. seth jones associate director of the security defense policy center at the rand corporation. former member of the joint terrorism task force and jeffrey toobin our legal analyst. jake is saying -- this is significant in terms of the information in this. but obviously a crucial question out there which is was it obtained before or after those miranda rights were read? >> the irony here is what he is saying is not particularly helpful to him. what would be helpful to him is if he had a conspiracy he could make the government to make
miranda rights? >> yes, that's my view. >> so that changes nothing in view of their ability to interrogate? >> what it changes is their ability to question him and use any statement that he makes. that they're not allowed to do. >> he is apparently claiming -- >> they don't need that in this case. they got a mountain of evidence against this guy. >> right. they have testified it seems against him and his brother for the act they perpetrated. >> correct. >> what they will i'm sure be extremely curious to find out if they can is are they part of a wider group of either like-minded individuals who have been coordinating themselves reading stuff on the internet, videos and so on, which apparently is what he's claiming. whether they're attached to anybody in chechnya, for example, or islamic fundamentalist nature, et cetera, et cetera, how far can you go in terms of eliciting that information from somebody like him in his position once he's had his miranda rights read to him as he now has? >> my view is you can go as far as you think it's productive to go. however, i don't think it's terribly p
asked if he understood what was happening. his miranda rights were read to him. they decided to read him his miranda rights. those were given to him today as well. the security here is very tight. in fact, what is interesting is, he potentially might get out of the hospital later than many of his victims that are also here recovering. greta? >> adam, in terms what have went down before he was mirandized, was he interviewed by the fbi or anybody in the last couple of days since he was taken into custody? did he give him information that they considered valuable and helpful? >> reporter: we learned a cowl of things. 1; yes, there were questions asked of him. the first few hours if not more than that, they were worried about making sure should thguy survives. he got here on friday night in pretty bad condition. he bled from injuries nearly 20 hours. he was obviously in rough condition. so the number-1 priority was to make sure he survived to get information from him. questions were asked of him before he was mirandized. they haven't said of course, they are not going to give away what he sa
. and his miranda rights were read to him. there was reporting if they weren't going to, but they decided to read him his miranda rights and those were given to him today as well. the security here is still very tight. what is interesting is he potentially might get out of the hospital later than many of his victims that are here also recovering. greta. >> adam, in terms of what went down before he was mirandized, was he interviewed by the fbi or by anybody in the last couple days since he was taken into custody? and it he give them information that they considered valuable and helpful? >> we learned a couple of things. yes, there were questions asked of him. the first few hours, if not more than that, obvious think they were making sure he survived so you had that situation. he got here friday night in pretty bad condition. he bled for nearly 24 hours and then the fire fight at the boat. the number one priority for them was to make sure he survived so they could get information from him. questions were asked of him before he was mirandized. they haven't said, of course, because it's part
a former federal prosecutor. we now that dzhokhar, suspect number two, has been read his miranda rights. sow won't be designated as an enemy combatant. but if he was labelled an enemy combatant, he wouldn't have been entitled to a lawyer and a jury trial. they could have asked him a lot of other questions without a lawyer present that may or may not be relevant to national security. now why did they make this decision not to go for enemy combatant status? do they think they have so much evidence in this case that they can go ahead with the civilian jury trial and they don't need to hide behind enemy combatant? >> i think that is certainly part of it. it does look like an overwhelming body of evidence. more than that, they thought they could get the immediate information they needed by the miranda exception, the public safety exception so they could make sure the public was safe. there accident seem to be an constitution aal basis to treat someone that commits a crime like this on our soil. the supreme court has upheld treating an american, the american taliban hamdi captured in afghanis
out the window. the whole issue of miranda, that is out the window. so there's going to have to be -- someone will have to determine whether or not this man should be treated like a citizen, someone who kills a police officer and a pathetically, or will thing, and he is entitled to all those rights and privileges as an american. this is an act of terrorism. this is the usable weapon of mass destruction. he goes into -- he could go into a different category, but someone in the united states american government has to classify him as such. then he is treated very differently. in american citizen jars of the typical crime, if you want to call it. stuart: and sorry to do this to you. stay right there. domestic this commercial break. we will be back quickly to myve, promise to that. ideas, goals, appetite for risk. you can't say 'one size fits all'. it doesn't. that's crazy. we're all totally different. ishares core. etf building blocks for your personalized portfolio. find out why 9 out o10 large professional investors choose ishares for their etfs. ishares by blackrock. call 1-8
of the boat. >> no miranda warning, do you want to explain that to us. > that is a federal issue. >> what was the question? >> there was no miranda warning given they were claiming a public safety exception. >> there is a public safety exemption involving acts of terrorism. so the government has the opportunity, right now. i believe that the suspect has been taken to a hospital. thank you. yes? i'm sorry? >> are you going to seek the death penalty? >> this is still an active, ongoing investigation. we're going to be reviewing up of the evidence before that kind of a decision is made in terms of whether or not to seek the death penalty you review all of the evidence and it is a very thoughtful, long process that is engaged and it is the attorney general of the department of justice that makes that final decision. i'm sorry? karen? >> can you talk a little bit about when you were on the scene, was he moving around? how did you know it was a chance to take him into custody? >> we know he did not go straight to the boat. when we set up the perimeter with the best intentions with a lot of info
Search Results 0 to 6 of about 7

Terms of Use (10 Mar 2001)